ORDER:

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. R.

Leela Sai Sampath as well as learned counsel for respondent No.1 Mr. Bala Mohan Rao.

2. This is wife’s petition filed under Section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure (in short “CPC”), seeking transfer of F.C.O.P. No.1523 of 2021 on the file of Additional Family Court, Visakhapatnam, to Family Court or any other competent Court at Srikakulam, as she is unable to travel from Srikakulam, being a lady and no person is there to accompany her and her parents are old and sick people having health issues.

3. The respondent/husband filed a counter affidavit denying the averments in the affidavit of the petitioner. It is the contention of the respondent that petitioner is aged only 25 years, having no children and her parents are also healthy and the distance between Srikakulam to Visakhapatnam is only 115 kms, which will take hardly two (02) hours journey time and there are no grounds to consider the request of the petitioner to transfer the case. He prays to dismiss the petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is residing in her parents’ house at Srikakulam by leaving her job due to harassment caused by her husband. He would further submit that the petitioner has no source of income to bear travel expenses as her parents are old and sick and she has no male support to travel to Visakhapatnam to put forth her defence in a divorce petition filed by her husband with false grounds. He prays to allow the petition

5. The learned counsel for the respondents would submit that previously petitioner worked as a Software Engineer in Tech Mahindra, Visakhapatnam but she left the job and now residing in her parents’ house, She being B-Tech Graduate, aged 25 years will be able to travel to Visakhapatnam, whereas respondent is working in Steel Plant, Visakhapatnam, it is difficult for him to travel to Srikakulam.

He prays to dismiss the petition.

6. It is consistent view of the Hon’ble Apex Court that in matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife has to be considered than the inconvenience of the husband. It has to be seen whether the grounds on which the petitioner is seeking transfer of the case are tenable or can be accepted.

7. In the present case, the grounds on which the petitioner is seeking to transfer is only “distance” i.e, distance between Srikakulam to Visakhapatnam ‘which is 115 kms and journey time is said to be only two (02) hours. In similar circumstances, Hon’ble Apex Court in Preeti Sharma- Petitioner Vs. Manjit Sharma-Respondent in Transfer Petition Nos.117-18 of 2004, order dated 29.04.2005, it is held that “merely because the Petitioner is a lady does not mean she cannot travel to Muzaffar Nagar. At the highest she can be paid expenses for travel and stay”.

8. In the present case also, the contention of the petitioner is that she being a lady not a position to travel a distance of 115 kms, which cannot be accepted in view of admitted fact that previously petitioner also worked as a Software Engineer in Tech Mahindra at Visakhapatnam city. The respondent is working in Steel Plant, Visakhapatnam, certainly, it would be difficult for him to travel to Srikakulam, if the request of the petitioner is considered, whereas the petitioner is a house maker and she can travel from Srikakulam to Visakhapatnam. As petitioner has stated that she has no source of income to bear travel and other expenses, the respondent can be directed to bear the same.

9. In the result, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. The respondent/husband is directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,000/- (One Thousand Rupees only) to the petitioner/wife towards travel and stay expenses of every occasion when the petitioner is required to attend before the Family Court, Visakhapatnam.

10. The learned Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam, shall ensure that such payment is made to the petitioner on every occasion of her attendance.

No order as to costs. Consequently,